The ten-point agenda would codify a woman’s right to choose an abortion, attempt to reduce gender-based pay discrimination, and strengthen protections for survivors of abuse.
Republican state lawmakers have introduced bills that would require admitting privileges at local hospitals for doctors who perform abortions, that would add further requirements to the state’s informed consent law, and that would modify the medication abortion law that was ruled unconstitutional by the state supreme court.
A flurry of legal briefs filed by members of Congress shows that resolution of the birth control benefit lawsuits is as much a political exercise as a judicial one.
Let’s go behind the statistics—behind the political rhetoric—to talk about the real impact of restrictions on abortion and bans on coverage.
A state senate committee heard arguments this week for enacting a 25-foot patient safety zone, while several anti-choice bills have been introduced in the house.
Rep. Timothy Jones (R-Eureka) introduced HB 1430, which, according to the bill language, would apply to medical professionals refusing to participate in procedures that include surgical and medication abortions, contraception, assisted reproduction, human cloning, and human embryonic stem-cell research.
Speaking in the Rules Committee, Rep. Alcee Hastings said, “I think men ought to butt out of this subject, and be about the business of respecting women and their rights.”
As more courts recognize a patient’s privacy rights to make end-of-life health-care decisions, it’s become clear that what courts characterize as “fundamental rights” don’t apply to pregnant people.
Friday’s order may prevent the Obama administration from enforcing the contraception mandate against the Little Sisters of the Poor, but it also may have just won the administration’s case.
Marlise Munoz’s family will finally be able to say goodbye to the 33-year-old, who collapsed in her home nearly nine weeks ago.